Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here

take action
For every $1 states spend dollar sign on substance misuse and addiction, 94 cents go to shovel up the consequences instead of for treatment and prevention. TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS

What Can I Do?



Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE

Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP

 

Obama Names Ed Jurith as Interim Drug Czar
January 28, 2009

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Report
by Bob Curley

Edward H. Jurith, the longtime lead lawyer for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), has been named the interim director of the agency by President Barack Obama.

Obama announced the appointment on Jan. 20 -- Inauguration Day. Jurith replaces Patrick M. Ward, named interim ONDCP director just eight days earlier by former President George Bush. Ward is ONDCP's acting deputy director of supply reduction.

This is Jurith's second stint as acting "drug czar" -- he was appointed acting ONDCP director by President Bill Clinton in the waning days of his administration, replacing Barry McCaffrey, and led the agency for nearly a year before President Bush named John Walters to lead ONDCP in December 2001.

Jurith has served as ONDCP's general counsel since 1994; prior to that he worked as staff director and counsel at the House Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, founded by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.). During his time in Congress, Jurith helped draft the Anti-Drug Abuse Acts of 1986 and 1988, which remain cornerstones of federal drug-control policy.

Jurith's responsibilities at ONDCP include providing legal advice on compliance with federal law and as related to the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign and other ONDCP programs.

Jurith also has served on the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Substance Abuse and, since July 2008, has served as an at-large member of the board of Faces and Voices of Recovery.

Pat Taylor, executive director of Faces and Voices, called Jurith a "dedicated public servant."

"We have a lot of respect for him," she said.

Jurith also has occasionally represented ONDCP in public forums, such as a December 2008 debate on medical marijuana with Dan Bernath, assistant communications director of the Marijuana Policies Project. "Jurith didn¹t lie, bully, or accuse me of secretly trying to get children hooked on marijuana," wrote Bernath on his blog after the debate. "His arguments at least had some basis in legal fact, although I believe they were far too narrow to justify denying seriously ill patients access to safe, effective medicine, let alone arresting them for it. But he was civil and thoughtful."

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by Fred Johnson on 29 Jan 09 11:57 AM EST
I have seen so many articles on medical marijuana and the truth of the matter is that marijunana is less addictive than alcohol or tobacco . Alcohol and tobacco are both legel but most important they both kill A lot of people and marijunana has never been proven to have killed anyone .So I say get it over with legalize it . Sell it in liquor stores , tax the heck out of it and pay the national dept off in two years . Not to mention the jobs , growers , pickers , packers and shippers . Sell it and they will buy it . Take A chance I know I am right .

Posted by ken on 29 Jan 09 01:26 PM EST
Since we have had little luck in taxing alcohol and tobacco enough to compensate for the death and diability they cause, I can't believe we would tax marijuana enogh either. Teens consistently tell us that the illegality of drugs is a deterent, thus the enormous abuse of alcohol and tobacco which is legal and seen as ok by youth. We don't need to increase marijuana use even more by adding it to our list of legal substances, epecially since the majority of teens entering treatment indicate marijuana as their drug of choice.

Posted by Michael on 29 Jan 09 01:28 PM EST
To get an idea of how effective the 'War on Drugs' is, please read the article posted here about the eradication of the poppy in Southeast Asia and it's effect. http://www.ungassondrugs.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=225&Itemid=65

Posted by maxwood on 29 Jan 09 03:59 PM EST
Fred: "tax the heck out of it and pay the national debt off"-- dream on. The reason entrenched interests are fighting legalization is they know that afterwards no oligarch, either industry or government, has a chance of making money off cannabis. Users are independent; they will boycott the high-tax store cannabis and raise their own. Ken: you have it reversed. The real potential for good-- and the reason for opposition-- is that legal cannabis will attract customers, especially youngsters, AWAY from alcohol and tobacco, making certain corporations and government both financially unhappy. The "majority of teens entering treatment" are doing so under threat and coercion so their numbers are no proof of anything wrong with the marijuana.

Posted by Julian on 29 Jan 09 05:19 PM EST
Maxwood- You say "The "majority of teens entering treatment" are doing so under threat and coercion so their numbers are no proof of anything wrong with the marijuana." This is proof there is a problem in that someone (family, friends, therapists) sees their use as a problem. I read these postings on marijuana and see one consistant thread about it being "less harmful". Medical mearijuana is used to relieve medical symptoms, people smoke marijauna for the mood altering effects. They are willing to risk sanctions from others to get that effect, period. "Normies" don't like the buzz or out of control effect that drugs and alcohol provide and stop if there are consequences from use. Those of us prone to chemical dependency on the other hand use for the effect and will continue to use despite the risk, period. Figure out whch one you are.

Posted by Karen on 29 Jan 09 08:05 PM EST
I am stunned that a career bureaucrat who has not distinguished himself as a credible expert on prevention or treatment issues is, once again, heading up ONDCP . . .CLOSE the office and allow NIAAA and NIDA to create policy and publish research. Having ONDCP is a total waste of taxpayers' dollars as it is a political sanctuary for opinions not facts; cliches not education and is demeaning to all those struggling with addiction issues. A medical doctor, NOT a an attorney, needs to be appointed . . .what a disgrace.

Posted by unspunhero on 29 Jan 09 08:14 PM EST
No! Not another career beaurocrat! Please President Obama, please! My vote is for Nora Volkow.

Posted by Karen on 29 Jan 09 08:27 PM EST
I cannot allow the wishful thinking and uninformed postings suggesting marijuana is a reasonable substance and no one dies from it pass without pointing out that it is a mind altering substance, THC collects and is stored in the brain, the additives are far more damaging than those in cigarettes. It has been linked to Parkinson's disease; fatal car crashes; alcohol poisoning as it suppresses the ability to vomit after overdosing on alcohol and IS an addcitive substance. Before suggesting legalizing and taxing, question why, when alcohol and tobacco are responsible for over 400,000 premature deaths annually already, why make another, more serious substance readily available? Why would anyone risk damaging their brain?? You protect a computer which is primitive by comparison, but readily subject your brain and organs to toxins and think there is no consequence? Please seek some education before publishing your opinions.

Posted by George E. Dean on 29 Jan 09 09:24 PM EST
As to Karen's logic of looking at alcohol and cigarettes as examples of legalized substances that have proven to be lethal--for not legalizing marijuana--she fails to acknowledge that people continued to buy alcohol when it was illegal, and would continue to buy cigarettes if they were ever banned. Just because marijuana is illegal hasn't prevented (and never will prevent) its use. So, why not legalize it so that it can be taxed, monitored for quality, so that people won't get criminal backgrounds for having it in their possession, and so that society's misfits will stop killing each other over the right to be the sole/primary supplier. Again, you cannot legislate morals; however, you can devise programs/strategies to assist those who lack them.

Posted by Brinna on 29 Jan 09 10:55 PM EST
Oh Karen. . . and I cannot allow another ill informed anti-cannabis diatribe to go on without a rebuttal. Mind altering you say? Additives? Addictive. Come on. These scare tactics are so 1984. Cannabis has been shown to help Parkinson's, not cause it. The US Gov't itself holds a patent (#6,630,507) based on the medical benefits of cannabis as a neuroprotectant and anti-inflammatory agent (and is offering it for licensing.) I'm glad you didn't add: "it causes cancer", because that old saw is so opposite of the truth (it actually fights cancer) that even Medline removed that warning from their website. The only reason cannabis continues to be prohibited is because it is the lynch pin of the failed "war on drugs" which has put tens of thousands of non-violent offenders behind bars, and keeps our Prisons for Profit well stocked.

Posted by Karen on 30 Jan 09 09:23 AM EST
During Prohibition alcohol related deaths were reduced by 50% Parkinson's may be helped, BUT it can also be caused. If a substance is legal the numbers using it increase. Legal does not mean "safe" and does not protect against health consequences. 1 out of 4 hospital patients have an alcohol-related health problem; 1 out of 5 students is a child of an alcoholic.These are HEALTH issues. Marijuana is addictive and damages the brain,this is not "reefer madness"marijuana wouldn't have any appeal if it didn't alter brain chemistry. Only two comments addressed appointing a left-over bureaucrat from the Clinton administration. FACT: Original legislation was crafted to exclude alcohol and focus on illegal drugs in response to pressure from the alcohol industry. Jurith read, and reviewed what someone else wrote and gave a legal opinion -- that is NOT education, NOT policy, and NOT what we need in an position that has Cabinet level authority. Protest his appointment rather than try to defend marijuana use. FYI increasing taxes on alcohol reduces use . . .substance abuse is a health issue not a political issue.

Posted by cenglish10 on 30 Jan 09 12:04 PM EST
Legalize industrial hemp, stop cutting down trees, save the planet, no more climate change! There's no buzz, but it will put the people who are making $$ from lumber and paper out of business, so they will make noise about its being tied to getting high.

Posted by cenglish10 on 30 Jan 09 12:09 PM EST
I hate to say it, but any substance, alcohol, tobacco, carbohydrates (potato chips, ice cream) or trauma/stress can alter your brain. If your brain is altered, you can change it back with neurofeedback, or meditation, or hypnosis, or therapy, or a host of other methods. But don't wait, get on it right away! Your brain can heal itself after an alcohol binge for instance, but you need to remain sober for a week. Same thing with any substance.

Posted by Fred Johnson on 30 Jan 09 04:04 PM EST
WOW!!Great response.Kern,you cant really belive that marijunana is wrose for you than tobacco(P.S.I quit smoking 3 weeks ago after 30 years YA!!)I have gotten in A hole lot of trouble in my past because of alcohol like DUI's,fighting,memory loss and last but not least JAIL.At this time I have NEVER got in any trouble from smoking marijuana and I am 45 years old so that means I have smoked A long time. As far as what you said as about the car crashs I would like to see something that indicates A car crash related to marijunana and only marijunana.I will also say if you need to vomit after you drink you need to be in AA and if you think marijunana is wrose for than alcohol than you are nuts or dont drink.I have never herd that marijunana can cause parkinsons but I did know some one with the disease(he has passed away)and when he smoked marijunana he could move around and he would stop shakeing.People are going to do what they want to do whether it is legal or not so legalize marijunana and reap the benefits medical use,taxs and jobs .Then the police can focus on problems like cocaine,crystal meth,murder,rape ect.(P.S.)Great comments Brinna, George,Julian and Maxwood

Posted by HL on 30 Jan 09 07:04 PM EST
For some reason, an often argument against depenalization or legalization of marijuana is, that making it "non-punishable", the amount of users would for some mysterious reason grow. Well, take a look at the USA. The more strict the laws have become, the more significant growth there has been in the masses using it. On the other hand, the Amsterdam region (Netherlands) has experienced from decrease in (domestic) cannabis - and also hard drug - users. It should be clear to everyone that it is impossible to make drugs disappear. Instead, the primary target should be in minimizing the possible harm they could do to an individual. The society will not gain much from abusing its members. Carrot would definitely work against the current weapon, "stick".

Posted by Mom on 02 Feb 09 09:42 AM EST
Obviously those of you who want marijuana legalized are already users. You have no need of it for health reasons. You've never had a child that you had to leave in rehab to try to get them off the drug. And you've never had to take that child a second time because the marijuana was just a step away from the meth that really hooked them. There needs to be stricter punishment for suppliers that get our children hooked on all these drugs. If it's legal in other countries, then let the suppliers go there and leave our children alone and ALIVE!

Posted by PapaToo on 02 Feb 09 05:06 PM EST
Dear Mom, I'm sorry your child fell victim, not once but twice to addiction. It is the addiction and addictive behaviors that needs focus and you and your child have. The flow of drugs is uncontrolled (some say out of control) if left to the gangs and thugs. I believe this as well. These folks will sell you or your child -anything- to make a profit. We must take the business of your children away from them. We must manage drugs under a legal context. The war on drugs does not work under current methodology. Your child's brush with addiction (twice) is proof of that. It's time we all start asking for a more intelligent conversation than we have today. I hope that Edward Jurith is open to new discussions and the changes that need to be made to the currently broken situation especially surrounding Cannabis/Hemp/Marijuana.

Posted by loaded on 02 Feb 09 06:34 PM EST
miss karen and mr. maxwood. i really hate to single you guys out, but you both must be the most uninformed people on the planet. marijuana has never been linked to fatal car crashes. if you look at what you said it's the combination of alcohol and cannabis. and maxwood (LOL), have you seen the profit that marijuana makes in cali? i don't think everyone can grow the quality you find @ the clinics there and if your in a clinic then you can legally grow your own, but everyone keeps going to the clinics.wake up america, the drug policies are nothing but control. the government wants you to use their drugs. thats why you see commercials on tv for any illness or symptom that you have. we have been programmed for years to trust your doctors and take the meds they prescribe you.i got a cousin who is hooked on vicodin, doctor prescribed mind you, and he looks like he does crystalmeyth. and when he doesn't have it, he goes into epuileptic seizures, one of the small side effect of the drug. the other which he is suffering from is depression. but thats just my 2 cents. aloha

Posted by Kathleen on 03 Feb 09 02:36 PM EST
Anyone who would believe that breathing hot smoke into their lungs has medical benefits, and no health consequences needs to look up the meaning of the word "denial".

Posted by Henry Steinberger from Madison WI on 03 Feb 09 08:29 PM EST
To label anyone who disagrees with you as "in denial" is neither civil nor thoughtful (traits credited to the new Czar). The question is one of relative harm. A person dying of cancer or from its treatment (which can be dangerous) may benefit more from chemicals transmitted via smoke to the lungs far more than they are damaged by the smoking. Thoughtful people look at relative degree of harm and quality of life, and don't just dogmatically insist that any use of a drug is bad per se. Being civil I don't label other people, but discuss their ideas.

Posted by Hank on 03 Feb 09 08:36 PM EST
Hey mom, that is one unfair assumtion you make that anyone who supports legalizing medical marijuana MUST therefore be a MJ smoker/user. Where do you get off with such logic? I don't smoke anything and I support the right of people to decide for themselves on this matter. I hope you never get a disease that does not respond to traditional medicine, but I suppose you wouldn't use a substance that could give you back your life if someone else arbitrarily (perhaps to protect pharmacutical profits and keep drug warriors employed post-prohibition) made that saving substance "illegal."

Posted by Kathleen on 04 Feb 09 03:03 PM EST
Henry, I did not say that anyone who disagrees with me is in denial. I said that if you believe that breathing hot smoke (of any kind) into your lungs is not going to have health consequences, you are in denial. That has nothing to do with opinion. We all have to make judgements re:risk vs. benefits of anything we put into our body. Some of the submitters, however, are making marijuana out to be a miracle drug w/out health risks. That is simply not true. Any drug smoked poses serious health risks not only for the user, but anyone else breathing in the secondhand smoke, particularly in light of current COPD incidence. That definitely needs to be taken into consideration. As we are reducing the amounts of secondhand tobacco smoke that people are exposed to, we need to be very careful of legislation that is going to expose more people to secondhand marijuana smoke. There are definite health risks involved.

SUBMIT A COMMENT:

Note: Comments are now held for moderator approval. More info

Name:

Comment:
(limit 250
words)

Enter this word
(help):
Change

GUIDELINES: 
Please keep comments on-topic, courteous, clean, non-commercial, and within the word limit.
Read the complete guidelines